Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OPV Replacement

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Really???
    Strikes me as a little strange that it took you three weeks to come up with a question in relation to the post and as such I'll take it as trolling and not dignify it with a response.
    Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Goldie fish View Post
      Here we go again.
      Dev, look around you. If you live in Ireland, or anywhere else, you will see that we are in the middle of a recession. Coming up with €190m for anything, let alone 3 ships, is a near impossibility, and the NS did well to secure a contract for 2 ships in the current climate. The EPV is not on the shelf. Trust me on that. Where the economy will be in 2014 will decide how we pay for it. As it stands, the delayed entry of the new ships into service is as a direct result of the McCarthy report. Prior to that the NS were ready for contracts in 2008 and had the economy not calved, and contracts signed at that stage, we could have had ships built by now. McCarthy decided ships would be replaced at 36 years, not 30 as originally planned.
      How long have the DF/DOD (including the NS) known that they would expect to get a 30 year life out of the P21 class?

      Lets take Emer as an example (as the oldest vessel in the fleet).

      Emer was commissioned in 1978, she should have been replaced in 2008. While the vessel is not going to fall apart at 30 years and 1 day, with more modern and efficient technology, the new vessels are much more cost efficient to run and man.

      Lets look at the timeline:

      Feb 1998 - Report to the Steering Group on the Review of the NS and AC - recognised that she was due for replacement in 2008 and that in order to be delivered the first payment should be made in 2006 - this gave the Government 8 years to prepare a tender

      Aug 2007 - RFP for OPVs published (Emer 29 years old)
      May 2008 - Closing date for RFTs
      Sept 2008 - Ireland official entered recession
      May 2009 - Preferred bidder selected
      July 2010 - Government approval given to enter negotiations
      Oct 2010 - Contract awarded
      2011 - Original planned delivery of first vessel (Emer 33 years old)
      April 2011 - McCarthy Report published
      Early 2014 - First vessel due for delivery (Emer will be 36 years old)
      2015 - Second vessel due for delivery
      2017 - Final payment due

      7 years to get a relative small vessel into service and it isn't as if the powers that be don't have relatively recent experience of this (with Roisin and Niamh).

      In comparsion, planning for Eithne (and I mean the outline plan) started in 1979, the keel was laid within 3 years and it was commissioned 2 years later in 1984 (and that was with serious delays in the shipyard).



      Originally posted by Seanachie View Post
      Strikes me as a little strange that it took you three weeks to come up with a question in relation to the post and as such I'll take it as trolling and not dignify it with a response.
      To be honest I only saw it this evening
      Last edited by DeV; 6 January 2012, 02:21.

      Comment


      • You are greatly mistaken with eithne(not surprisingly). The concept was first put forward in 1978, but the speed of construction bypassed the tender process totally, as its construction was vital to keep a semi-state dockyard open for business. There was no tender, there was barely a contract, and the design changed during construction numerous times. The Budgeted amount that became the cost of Eithne was supposed to build Eithne, Her sister chip, and a civilian research ship of similar design. It was built in a dockyard that had nothing else to do, and had the facility and staff to build three ships at the same time, all concentrating on building one ship. You cannot compare.
        Read your own post regarding the timeline, and as usual, you are contradicting your own "opinion". All of the delays were outside the control of the Naval service. I presume this is who you mean by "powers that be". You also leave out the external consultants who reviewed the tenders before acceptance. There is a difference between RFP and RFT. The RFT was much later than you state, and the delayed payment is a cost saving measure. A government cannot prepare a tender until it has accepted Proposals first. It then invites successful proposors to tender, the proposers return to their offices and do so. It isn't a question of sending them a drawing of a ship and saying "build this please" (as was the case for Eithne).
        Keep in mind also that L.E. Roisin, replacement for Deirdre, was only contracted in 1997, Having first been proposed in 1995. It arrived in 1999. We were "awash with money" at the time, according to a former minister for finance, and Appledore were then a standalone company, struggling to survive. Since Niamh was built, they went into liquidation, and were taken over by DML, then Babcock. Considering what happened the Medium Lift heli contract, I would not be surprised if the tender process was accellerated in the earlier case to keep the shipyard open.

        At the end of the day dev, the NS/DoD cannot even talk about looking for any new piece of equipment, unless they get the nod first from Dept Finance.

        But anyway, what is your point? Why do you keep coming in here and criticising the procurement process, and affirming that it will never happen? What is your angle?


        Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Goldie fish View Post
          You are greatly mistaken with eithne(not surprisingly). The concept was first put forward in 1978, but the speed of construction bypassed the tender process totally, as its construction was vital to keep a semi-state dockyard open for business. There was no tender, there was barely a contract, and the design changed during construction numerous times. The Budgeted amount that became the cost of Eithne was supposed to build Eithne, Her sister chip, and a civilian research ship of similar design. It was built in a dockyard that had nothing else to do, and had the facility and staff to build three ships at the same time, all concentrating on building one ship. You cannot compare.
          Hands up I wasn't around in those days. I knew that it was Eithne that was keeping the dockyard open, the delays, cost overruns and sister ship (but not about the civvy ship and lack of tender).


          Read your own post regarding the timeline, and as usual, you are contradicting your own "opinion". All of the delays were outside the control of the Naval service. I presume this is who you mean by "powers that be".
          While senior NS management would fall into that category... they are the small fish (they should have been looking for replacements a lot earlier .... in fairness they may have done).


          You also leave out the external consultants who reviewed the tenders before acceptance.
          In fairness I did (I couldn't find the dates).

          There is a difference between RFP and RFT. The RFT was much later than you state, and the delayed payment is a cost saving measure. A government cannot prepare a tender until it has accepted Proposals first. It then invites successful proposors to tender, the proposers return to their offices and do so. It isn't a question of sending them a drawing of a ship and saying "build this please" (as was the case for Eithne).
          I'm well aware of that but not all contracts require a RFP phase.

          Keep in mind also that L.E. Roisin, replacement for Deirdre, was only contracted in 1997, Having first been proposed in 1995. It arrived in 1999. We were "awash with money" at the time, according to a former minister for finance, and Appledore were then a standalone company, struggling to survive. Since Niamh was built, they went into liquidation, and were taken over by DML, then Babcock. Considering what happened the Medium Lift heli contract, I would not be surprised if the tender process was accellerated in the earlier case to keep the shipyard open.
          I wasn't aware of the problems in Appledore but even then we are talking 4 years, even if planning construction took could have taken another 2 years that is still 1 year less.

          At the end of the day dev, the NS/DoD cannot even talk about looking for any new piece of equipment, unless they get the nod first from Dept Finance.
          +1

          But anyway, what is your point? Why do you keep coming in here and criticising the procurement process, and affirming that it will never happen? What is your angle?
          My points are:
          - the NS is current operating 3 vessels (of 1 class) that wouldn't be as cost efficient or effective as they once were
          - that they will eventually be replaced by up to 3 vessels of 1 class which are among the world leaders (if Roisin and Niamh are anything to go by)
          - if the process had started when it should have started we could now have in service 5 vessels of 1 class (ie Roisin/Niamh (I'm aware there are some differences)) and all the cost efficiencies that would come with that - having said that they wouldn't be as capable as the newer ones should be

          I guess my bottom line is like so many things, the Government of the day, prioritised (themselves and developers) before the needs of the State. To this cost

          Comment


          • This strikes me as yet another meaningless however well-intention "conversation".
            Was anybody posting on this thread actually present in the DoD or NS planning office when any of these decisions were made ?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Pod View Post
              This strikes me as yet another meaningless however well-intention "conversation".
              Was anybody posting on this thread actually present in the DoD or NS planning office when any of these decisions were made ?
              If they were, do you think they'd admit to it?


              Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

              Comment


              • if the process had started when it should have started we could now have in service 5 vessels of 1 class (ie Roisin/Niamh (I'm aware there are some differences))
                The new ones will not be the same as the P50s,The advantage of not rushing into builds and reviewing the performance being you can change the spec.

                Had the continued on with the P50 class as it was we would have ended up with five ships with the same uncorrected faults.

                the P20 and P21s were different classes and each improved on each other, it to 10 years to get the classes into service, all four vessels, all built in Ireland with the spec changing everytime, each one being an improvement over the other.


                having said that they wouldn't be as capable as the newer ones should be
                Different class, some big changes, their capabilities will be unique so comparrison with other classes would have to be carried out on a like for like basis as opposed to a complete over view.

                I think it should be noted that since the P50s came on stream the service has not stood still and there has been huge aquisition and changes around how the remainder of the fleet was upgraded in line with some of the equipment introduced with the new ships.

                Eithne for instance has had major changes to what boats she carries and how

                All the PVs and CPVs and OPV have had their secondary armament changed, along with various other electronic and mechanical upgrades.

                To carry out all this work has probably cost the equivalent of a new ship over the time since the P50s were delivered ,juts to keep what we have on a level playing field without going off and building new vessels while the older ones become substandard.

                What if funding had not been granted for the new builds and we had built a third P50 and not spent the money on upgrades, you can be sure that we would be in a far worse place that we are now, given the running costs of the P50s in comparrison to the PVs.Probably would have ended up with the three P21 class out of service and a third or possibly two P50s tied up due to fuel consumption issues.

                Worst case scenario at this point Emer gets decommissioned pending the delivery of a P60, and the remainder get ied up as replacement for them arrives,hoping the P60s will be more fuel efficient than their immediate predecessors.


                Hands up I wasn't around in those days. I knew that it was Eithne that was keeping the dockyard open, the delays, cost overruns and sister ship (but not about the civvy ship and lack of tender).
                Eithne is a history lesson in herself, too much heresay out there,

                Read 'Fifty Years a Ship Builder' by Patrick G Martin for the definitive version on how the DoD and the Army and Irish Shipping, made a bollocks of the Eithne saga.( great ship that she is !)
                Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                Comment


                • Paddy Martin's book is my bible.


                  Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

                  Comment


                  • Worst case scenario at this point Emer gets decommissioned pending the delivery of a P60, and the remainder get ied up as replacement for them arrives,hoping the P60s will be more fuel efficient than their immediate predecessors.





                    The P60s will be more efficent. The gearbox in them will alow them to be driven at slow speeds by the generators. EG overnight steaming. So thats prob one engine as well so it will be minimum fuel used during this process.
                    Last edited by A/TEL; 6 January 2012, 18:31.

                    Comment


                    • The P60s are based on the P50s, similar design extended (having said that the internal arrangements could be completely different).

                      The P50s have been around long enough that they (should) know the problems/improvements that could be made (having said that the only real way you can find out if something works is to build it).

                      The lessons learnt should be incorporated into the new vessels and (if possible) upgrades made to the older vessels to make them as similar as possible.

                      Worst case scenario at this point Emer gets decommissioned pending the delivery of a P60, and the remainder get ied up as replacement for them arrives,hoping the P60s will be more fuel efficient than their immediate predecessors.
                      It is a possibility it may be a good idea.... maybe not.

                      In 2010, the patrol days were cut by 200 days, has it been increased since?
                      That is the equivalent of 1 less vessel in the NS, so why not tie it up/sell Emer?

                      I'm sure that the NS (like the rest of the DF) is losing people, so it could take the pressure of other sea-going personnel.

                      The major problem?
                      DOD / Finance see oh you can do the job with a 7 ship flotilla?! Then you don't need a replacement!

                      Read 'Fifty Years a Ship Builder' by Patrick G Martin for the definitive version on how the DoD and the Army and Irish Shipping, made a bollocks of the Eithne saga.( great ship that she is !)
                      Any idea where you can get it ? Amazon says it is out of print.

                      Comment


                      • The P60s are based on the P50s, similar design extended (having said that the internal arrangements could be completely different).
                        Wouldn't be anything new, try finding your way around Aisling after been on Emer,

                        The P60s will be more efficent. The gearbox in them will alow them to be driven at slow speeds by the generators. EG overnight steaming. So thats prob one engine as well so it will be minimum fuel used during this process
                        one notable huge difference

                        (
                        having said that the only real way you can find out if something works is to build it)
                        .

                        Same happened with the P50s, what looks good on paper isn't always the way it works on water, Niamh is an improvement on Roisin but both have similar basic faults that were only found after operational service.

                        The change in hull lenght will throw up more uncertainties, so while lessons are learned there are unpredictable qualities good and bad.

                        That is the equivalent of 1 less vessel in the NS, so why not tie it up/sell Emer?
                        If it takes you 40 years to get to a point where you have the optimum number available, you don't step away from that number until you have guaranteed replacement.

                        I'm sure that the NS (like the rest of the DF) is losing people, so it could take the pressure of other sea-going personnel
                        .

                        Sure is,but the people who are going are not going to be able to be replaced short term, its experience in man years thats been lost.There is sufficient experience to replace them short term but across the DF the skills base can't be left wanting because of embargoes on recruitment and promotion.Its one thing to kill a service because of a lack of ships, they tried that before didn't work, but starve it of man power is another issue.

                        Any idea where you can get it ? Amazon says it is out of print.
                        Try a Library, put it on request, might help.
                        Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                        Comment


                        • The Surface Security, Interdiction and Maritime Support System, SIMSS



                          Interesting concept!

                          Comment


                          • Now that's multi-role!

                            (Link not working though)


                            Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Goldie fish View Post
                              Now that's multi-role!

                              (Link not working though)
                              Works fine for me...
                              "Well, stone me! We've had cocaine, bribery and Arsenal scoring two goals at home. But just when you thought there were truly no surprises left in football, Vinnie Jones turns out to be an international player!" (Jimmy Greaves)!"

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Truck Driver View Post
                                Works fine for me...
                                Seems to work on older versions of IE.


                                Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X